[-empyre-] Three Little Words

[G.H. Hovagimyan]

GH comments below:

On Jan 1, 2010, at 12:44 PM, John Haber wrote:

> explicit,” “implicit,” and “complicit.” They might sum up three
> attempts at escape.


GH comments:
I ask the question of other artists, why make art and who do you make  
art for?  Is it a dialog with art history? Do you think there's some  
sort of aesthetic problem solving involved? Maybe you consider  
yourself a sort of cultural barometer or aesthetic researcher. Of  
course there's always the howl of expression.    Personally I don't  
understand explicit, implicit or complicit in reference to art.  Maybe  
you are talking about the huge art world support systems, jobs,  
markets, art fairs, galleries and so on. Does an artists engage these  
systems, ignore them or create alternatives?  If one tries to create  
alternatives as many do, are they relegated to aesthetic backwaters  
without galleries or market shares?  Who decides what is relevant to  
art discourse and what isn't? Aren't most art writers dependent on the  
system as it exists? Jerry Salz, the New York art critic recently  
posted on facebook about how the market limits what and who art  
theorists can write about. He said something to the effect that with  
the recession maybe there will be less writing about Jeff Koons and  
other blue chip artists. Even the idea of blue chip is laughable. It  
has a stock market connotation.


G.H. Hovagimyan
http://nujus.net/~gh
http://artistsmeeting.org
http://turbulence.org/Works/plazaville